CHANGING the leader has dramatically changed the Federal coalition. But is it just a ruse to win the next election?

Labelling politicians and putting them into boxes is convenient. But it is always tricky. It simplifies the message, but rarely paints the full picture.

The electorate did not like this level of conservatism. It’s not that Abbott is not personable; most who have met and chatted to him would agree. But this is the same for the vast majority of politicians, it’s how they get through pre-selection. It contrasts with an uncompromising commitment to his conservative ideology.

The ACT Liberals wrestle with the same tensions. Leader Jeremy Hanson is politically more aligned to Turnbull while the majority of his colleagues are on the conservative end of the spectrum. Oppositional politics has been a determinant to a certain extent, but generally they have tended to lean to the conservative side, particularly on social issues.

In the week after Turnbull’s ascendancy to Prime Minister, Labor’s Deputy Leader Tanya Plibersek identified him as “a hollow man” arguing that his “backflips” on climate change and marriage equality illustrate that “this new Prime Minister is actually just like the old one. There’s a bit of difference to the style, but the policies are the same”.

It may have looked that way, however the past few months have revealed an extraordinary change in tone across government. The conservatives have slipped into the background and the liberals (or wets) have found their feet.

The challenge is determining the extent to which this is smoke and mirrors. Is it a ruse for electoral advantage or a genuine case of changing to a more thoughtful, measured approach, as the new Prime Minister has clearly delivered?

The vast majority of conservatives have seen the outcome of militant conservatism and made the pragmatic decision that it’s better to be in government and accept the compromise of a more moderate approach.

ACT Senator Zed Seselja, a strong Abbott supporter and a self-proclaimed conservative, has been surprisingly quiet. Perhaps he has also determined the pragmatic approach is better for the party and better for his own future opportunities.

Despite all the grandiloquence about the disaster of revolving leadership, our parliamentary system is operating the way it should. The electorate has welcomed the softer, more thoughtful, consultative, less combative Turnbull government.

The Prime Minister’s parliamentary statement following the terrorist attacks in Paris illustrates the point when he argued Australia should not abandon its values as “the most successful and harmonious multicultural society in the world”.

Rather than stridently reacting by seeking stronger laws that undermine liberty, he took a more measured approach, suggesting “the terrorists want us to bend to their will, to be frightened, to change the way we go about our lives, to abandon our values. If we do that, they win and they will not win, we will not let them win.”

As the ACT Liberals seek government, in October, will lessons from the conservative Abbott and Campbell Newman governments hit home? If they run hardline conservative policies into the next election Canberrans will be faced with a “Hobson’s choice”.